std.range: Order of arguments unluckily chosen?

[so]

> Well this hurts. With the same in mind as you, I initially defined take  
> to take the number first. But OO people wanted to write array.take(3),  
> so I changed the order. Don't forget that UFCS is still on the table.
>
> Impossible to please everybody!
>
> I don't know what to do to improve the situation.

This is the reason of quite many of the discussions here boils down to, we  
(not being a contributor, maybe i should say "you") shouldn't cater for  
particular groups be it either Functional or OO.
If they don't feel something right, they should also consider the other  
side of the table, and come up with compelling arguments. Reading recent  
posts, i really started to think the word "subjectivity" is just a  
horse-waste to divert our attention. Given none of our backgrounds match  
one another, none of our experiences match with one another, none of our  
open/close mindedness match with one another.

I like OO more than most of the people here, but it is simply a freaking  
paradigm. If some people just want everything OO way, knowing none of its  
drawbacks... Forgive my language, fuck them.
We have many languages out there just doing that, and yet the only reason  
we are here is that we know they suck.